Home > Planning > Planning Policy

PLEASE NOTE: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

If you haven't got an account you can register now.
If you have forgotten your password you can request a new password.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive) - Q6

Representation ID: 12977

COMMENT Ipswich Borough Council (

Summary:

In our response to your Duty to Cooperate - Key Issues Scoping consultation on 14th July 2017, we outlined that the preparation of a joint strategic Local Plan for Ipswich Borough and Babergh, Mid Suffolk, and Suffolk Coastal Districts would be the best mechanism to properly consider the strategic growth options that would address the key issues identified for the benefit of the IHMA and the Ipswich Functional Economic Area (IFEA) in the most sustainable manner. We requested that effective and timely collaboration is undertaken, with a joint approach to strategic planning in the HMA and FEA.

More details about Rep ID: 12977

Representation ID: 12915

OBJECT Dr Jonathan Tuppen

Summary:

It is not clear where authority is derived to ignore the NPPF as a whole document. By starting at p.156 the need to engage and involve local communities is not fully addressed. The present process of consultation is not a substitute for proper engagement .

More details about Rep ID: 12915

Representation ID: 12738

COMMENT Building Partnerships Ltd. represented by La Ronde Wright Limited (Mrs Nicole Wright)

Summary:

The Joint Local Plan should identify how it has been influenced by other factors such as the need to accommodate unmet need from elsewhere, in particular housing need which cannot be met within Ipswich.

More details about Rep ID: 12738

Representation ID: 12558

COMMENT Fressingfield Housing Working Group (Mr Paul Woodward)

Summary:

Co-operation is needed with neighbouring authorities where residents of one district work or use services in another. Housing need in one district may need to be met in another and vice versa

More details about Rep ID: 12558

Representation ID: 12302

OBJECT Taylor Wimpey represented by Boyer Planning (Mr. James Bailey)

Summary:

Urge the Councils to provide policy mechanisms to deal with neighbouring authorities' unmet housing need during the next stage of their emerging Local Plan. Imperative that the Councils' unmet housing need is identified prior to the emerging Local Plan progressing further. In identifying site allocations, we consider that Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils should consider the unmet need from Ipswich District, and the ability of certain sites that are located abutting Ipswich Borough to accommodate for this unmet need.

More details about Rep ID: 12302

Representation ID: 12096

COMMENT Gladman (Mr Richard Crosthwaite)

Summary:

The scale of new growth that is required to shape the future of the area will require the
consideration of a range of different delivery options, including those across local authority
boundaries. In addition, it is noted that a new economic strategy is due to be published by the New
Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership in October 2017. It is important that the ambitions of the LEP
are reflected within the local plans that are prepared in the area and that the implementation of this
important strategy is carefully considered through the duty to cooperate and integrated within
Local Plans in their final form.

More details about Rep ID: 12096

Representation ID: 11914

COMMENT Pigeon Investmenrt Management (Mr. Andrew Fillmore) represented by Beacon Planning Ltd (Ms Sophie Pain)

Summary:

The Council highlights that potential matters for strategic co-operation are complex. It is therefore very important that the authorities make clear how these issues will be addressed, their programme and how these fit into each districts Local Plan. A Statement of Common Ground early in the Plan process would be of considerable benefit in identifying an approach and responsibilities

More details about Rep ID: 11914

Representation ID: 11819

COMMENT Dedham Vale Society (Mr. David Eking)

Summary:

We would have thought that The Dedham Vale AONB and Stour Valley Project would have been listed among the key DtC partners to be consulted under the conservation and enhancement of the natural and historic environment on page 15.

More details about Rep ID: 11819

Representation ID: 11666

OBJECT Lady Valerie Hart

Summary:

Environment protection section needs to include another statutory consultee namely Historic Gardens Trust which is statutory consultee for historic parks and gardens as well as Heritage England.
I consider also that it is very important for BDC to cooperate closely with parish councils where the parish council has expressed a wish to be involved on development proposals in its parish, especially with regard to planning obligations and Section 106 provisions.

More details about Rep ID: 11666

Representation ID: 11356

COMMENT Stour & Orwell Society (Ms Emma Proctor King)

Summary:

Again, given the national priority given to AONBs and the fact that Babergh has extensive nationally designated AONB (including the Shotley Peninsula), running right up to the southern edge of Ipswich, the conservation of this area needs to be expressly identified as a key DTC issue. Mid Suffolk does not have this issue to address.

More details about Rep ID: 11356

Representation ID: 11244

COMMENT Suffolk Wildlife Trust (Mr James Meyer)

Summary:

The Duty-to-Cooperate should include the Recreational Disturbance Avoidance Mitigation Strategy (RAMS) which is being prepared by Babergh, Ipswich and Suffolk Coastal councils.

More details about Rep ID: 11244

Representation ID: 11162

COMMENT Old Newton Parish Council (Mrs Karen Price)

Summary:

District wise Social Care and health services need to be enhanced to handle increased population.

More details about Rep ID: 11162

Representation ID: 10899

COMMENT Lady Anne Windsor Charity (Deborah Langstaff)

Summary:

The Homes and Communities Agency should be key DtC partner for sections 1) and 3) in addition to section 1)

More details about Rep ID: 10899

Representation ID: 10757

COMMENT Mendlesham Parish Council (Mrs Sharon Jones )

Summary:

No

More details about Rep ID: 10757

Representation ID: 10612

COMMENT Mrs LP Wheatley

Summary:

Should need to co-operate when it puts present residents of Sproughton's quality of life at stake.
Babergh shouldn't be co-operating with other Local Authorities in the Ipswich Housing Market Area when it should be conserving the landscape and healthy quality of life of its own residents.

More details about Rep ID: 10612

Representation ID: 10603

COMMENT Ms Caroline Powell

Summary:

Why have Fringe Parishes been excluded from the Ipswich Fringe Policy Forum. Duty to Cooperate is under NPPF supposed to go down through the government hierarchy not just sideways and up. This surely is a massive failing the imposition of the consequences unacceptable.

More details about Rep ID: 10603

Representation ID: 9692

COMMENT Miss R P Baillon

Summary:

Different areas of Mid Suffolk need to be analysed so that aspects of the Duty to Co-operate that have not been fulfilled are dealt with fully before new projects are undertaken.

More details about Rep ID: 9692

Representation ID: 9514

COMMENT Cllr John Hinton

Summary:

Co-operation with North Essex Councils is one thing but the impact of so few "crossing points" into Essex, and their vulnerability to significant natural and accidental impacts, makes the issue complex and when too many bodies are involved (often with a limited overall appreciation of the issues, just interested in their own), eg. ECC, SCC, Highways England, Network Rail, NALEP , SELEP, issues are lost in the long grass.

More details about Rep ID: 9514

Representation ID: 9422

COMMENT Bacton Parish Council (mrs tina newell)

Summary:

Under infrastructure provision you consult with the local commissioning groups, does this include Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust? Public transport and car parking for outpatients, visitors and staff is a major problem and needs improvement to accommodate growth in the region.

More details about Rep ID: 9422

Representation ID: 8932

COMMENT Andrew Searle

Summary:

Same as 5a - All co-operation itemised is upwards, none is downwards to community or neighbourhood.

More details about Rep ID: 8932

Representation ID: 8734

COMMENT Mr Philip Schofield

Summary:

Plan for joint employment/housing deployments, rather than one without the other - seek to enable "working where you live"

More details about Rep ID: 8734

Representation ID: 8721

OBJECT David Black & Sons Ltd. (Mr. James Black)

Summary:

The focus here seems to be on Authority based entities. I believe there are other private and charitable bodies that could assist in the development of a more holistic Local Plan. Particularly for example the local Chambers of Commerce and Housing Associations operating in the area.

More details about Rep ID: 8721

Representation ID: 7661

COMMENT Chilton Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

Environment protection section needs to include another statutory consultee namely Historic Gardens Trust which is statutory consultee for historic parks and gardens as well as Heritage England.
We consider also that it is very important for BDC to cooperate closely with parish councils where the parish council has expressed a wish to be involved on development proposals in its parish, especially with regard to planning obligations and Section 106 provisions.

More details about Rep ID: 7661

Representation ID: 7591

COMMENT Mrs Annette Brennand

Summary:

No.

More details about Rep ID: 7591

Representation ID: 7275

COMMENT Mr Mark Blackwell

Summary:

Any plan needs to include measures over and above those legally required. This is supposed to be a local plan, made by the local population for the benefit of the local area. This includes new and affordable housing for new residents but the interests of private companies and developers should not be put above residents. Where there are public funds available, consideration should be made to compensatre those who suffer financial loss, in the same way that compensation is made for those who suffer from large infrastructure projects.

More details about Rep ID: 7275

Representation ID: 7273

COMMENT Dr DAVID Brennand

Summary:

None that I am aware of.

More details about Rep ID: 7273

Representation ID: 7148

SUPPORT Ms Helen Davies

Summary:

None that I can think of

More details about Rep ID: 7148

Representation ID: 6853

COMMENT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Climate change mitigation and adaption means more than conservation and enhancement of natural and historic environment. There is the need to make sure people can travel safely in non polluting ways and that businesses and homes aim to produce as little waste and pollution as possible.

More details about Rep ID: 6853

Representation ID: 6812

COMMENT Botesdale & Rickinghall CAP Group (Mr. William Sargeant)

Summary:

6 An additional Housing issue is the protection and preservation of historic and listed buildings and their environment.

More details about Rep ID: 6812

Representation ID: 6694

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

At a local level and within the Ipswich Fringe: Landscape, Infrastructure particularly in relation to transport, and community identities.
We would welcome involvement to cooperate with the Ipswich Fringe forum as we like other Parishes are the actual communities involved.
But we are excluded which is unreasonable, secretive and suspicious and certainly cannot be representative.

More details about Rep ID: 6694

Representation ID: 6326

COMMENT MSDC Green Group (Cllr John Matthissen)

Summary:

Q6 Add to the key planning issues
* Climate change impact of development including infrastructure across the county and the region.
* Ensuring consistent approach to environmental sustainability and mitigation for climate change

More details about Rep ID: 6326

Representation ID: 6083

COMMENT Sproughton Parish Council (Mrs Susan Frankis)

Summary:

No.

More details about Rep ID: 6083

Representation ID: 6039

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

N/A

More details about Rep ID: 6039

Representation ID: 6021

OBJECT Neil Fuller

Summary:

* Ipswich say they have insufficient land to meet their projected housing numbers which means under the 'Duty to Cooperate' surrounding district councils must assist in finding land to accommodate Ipswich housing overspill. In this case around 4000 dwellings - how are Babergh proposing to help meet this requirement? Babergh should NOT be picking up all 4000.

More details about Rep ID: 6021

Representation ID: 5817

COMMENT Little Cornard Parish Council (Mr Dave Crimmin)

Summary:

Add in Healthy Communities and Education.

More details about Rep ID: 5817

Representation ID: 5811

COMMENT Little Waldingfield Parish Council (Mr Andy Sheppard)

Summary:

Nothing immediately springs to mind

More details about Rep ID: 5811

Representation ID: 5519

COMMENT Mr Graham Moxon

Summary:

Preservation of villages in size and layout, limiting their development to an acceptable level and maintaining the sense of belonging and community felt by their residents.

More details about Rep ID: 5519

Representation ID: 5440

COMMENT Denham Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

Denham Parish Council wishes the provision of broadband in rural areas to be a consideration.

More details about Rep ID: 5440

Representation ID: 5189

COMMENT Mr Terence Gray

Summary:

Infrastructure, communication and Transport but there is no mention of statuary providers

More details about Rep ID: 5189

Representation ID: 5161

OBJECT Long Melford Parish Council (Mr Robert Wiliams)

Summary:

treatment of committed development - In our view this is a wrong analysis of the committed developments; they should be deducted from the requirement in the settlements in which the commitments have occurred not across the District as a whole

More details about Rep ID: 5161

Representation ID: 5090

COMMENT Mrs Rosemary Jones

Summary:

Impact of style of housing needs attention. Traditional building materials vary considerably across the county but currently builders seem to have one style only.

More details about Rep ID: 5090

Representation ID: 4946

COMMENT Brantham Parish Council (Mrs Sarah Keys)

Summary:

No.

More details about Rep ID: 4946

Representation ID: 4551

COMMENT Lavenham Parish Council (Carroll Reeve)

Summary:

Defined housing market area goes beyond JLP boundary. Demands of adjacent areas and Ipswich in particular, requires an urgent review of levels of urban density to start to address and contain the sprawl of the County Town into rural areas. See attached paper named Housing Density Urban, Rural

More details about Rep ID: 4551

Representation ID: 4549

COMMENT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

There needs to be "sign off" with Suffolk County Council on delivering the 'priority' infrastructure investment required.

More details about Rep ID: 4549

Representation ID: 4442

OBJECT Mr Carroll Reeve

Summary:

Defined housing market area goes beyond JLP boundary. Demands of adjacent areas and Ipswich in particular, requires an urgent review of levels of urban density to start to address and contain the sprawl of the County Town into rural areas. See attached paper.

More details about Rep ID: 4442

Representation ID: 4116

COMMENT Holton St Mary Parish Council (Ms Dorothy Steeds )

Summary:

Cooperation has its limits; it should be a genuine partnership; development should be proportionate and should not be at the expense of or result in the undermining of the community that may be affected.

More details about Rep ID: 4116

Representation ID: 4058

COMMENT Mrs Sheila Hurdwell

Summary:

Neighbourhood Plans and Village Design Statements should be given appropriate weight. Planning decisions should consider adjacent applications when determining an application for development as the total impact on an area may destroy rural environments.

More details about Rep ID: 4058

Representation ID: 4021

OBJECT Miss Abigail Mayston

Summary:

Ipswich state they have insufficient land and require 4000 more houses. Why is Babergh picking up the full allocation? This goes beyond a duty to cooperate.

More details about Rep ID: 4021

Representation ID: 3972

COMMENT ms sally sparrow

Summary:

I am not aware of any other issues

More details about Rep ID: 3972

Representation ID: 3645

OBJECT Mr Neil Lister

Summary:

Defining functional area for sustainable off road transport (for business/recreation) and defining objectively assessed need. This is never planned for/provided from day one. Here's your chance.

More details about Rep ID: 3645

Representation ID: 3592

OBJECT Mr Simon Oldfield

Summary:

The crucial planning framework should be: At least 70% of development should be in urban areas and 30% or less in rural areas to preserve traditional villages. Tourism is now a vital industry in Babergh and Mid Suffolk. Visitor numbers will decline rapidly if our traditional villages are ruined by development such as in Acton where 200 houses are planned and in Long Melford which faces similar over-development. Important tourism ventures such as the Wool Towns Initiative - designed to boost the local economy - will be fruitless if our traditional rural environment is destroyed by developers

More details about Rep ID: 3592

Representation ID: 3553

COMMENT angela harvey

Summary:

Individual and community wellbeing.

More details about Rep ID: 3553

Representation ID: 3402

COMMENT Mr John Kitson

Summary:

None identified

More details about Rep ID: 3402

Representation ID: 3111

COMMENT Iain Pocock

Summary:

Adequate consideration needs to be given to transport infrastructure across the district and the need to disburse the non-urban growth

More details about Rep ID: 3111

Representation ID: 2914

SUPPORT Cllr Diana Kearsley

Summary:

I do support this but wold also like to see serious consideration given to the idea to create a new 'garden village' to provide good purposeful housing mix, health centre. schools, sports facilities etc.

More details about Rep ID: 2914

Representation ID: 2846

COMMENT Diss & District Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group (Ms Deborah Sarson)

Summary:

Deliver pro-active co-operation in order to fulfil the Duty to Support Neighbourhood Plan groups and especially those working across boundaries, such as the DDNP, in order to secure timely and successful progress.

More details about Rep ID: 2846

Representation ID: 2554

COMMENT Cockfield Parish Council (Mr Doug Reed)

Summary:

Cockfield Parish Council believes this questions has no relevance to the village.

More details about Rep ID: 2554

Representation ID: 2439

COMMENT Anglian Water (Mr Stewart Patience)

Summary:

Anglian Water is not identified as a prescribed body for the Duty to Co-operate under the relevant regulations. However we would welcome the opportunity to comment on the relevant sections of the Draft Local Plan when these are being drafted ideally prior to formal consultation. Examples of district wide policies of relevance to Anglian Water are as follows:

* flood risk,
* water supply,
* foul drainage and sewage treatment,
* surface water drainage/SuDS,
* water efficiency and
* renewable energy generation (please comments relating to Q52)

More details about Rep ID: 2439

Representation ID: 2414

COMMENT Preston St Mary Parish Council (Nicola Smith)

Summary:

The plan does not take into account the need for many people to live in more densely populated areas such as Ipswich and the Ipswich overspill, i.e the possibility of building upwards on the same square footage of land. Some people want or choose to live in more densely populated areas for ease of commute to work, lifestyle such as bars, theatres etc. Just because housing can be more densely populated does not mean it should not be well thought out space within the property, but there is scope for densely populated areas in some places and that should not be discounted without consultation of the needs of those people who want to work within a short walk commute in areas such as Ipswich.

More details about Rep ID: 2414

Representation ID: 2357

COMMENT Chelmondiston PC (Mrs Rosie Kirkup)

Summary:

Neighbourhood Plans and Village Design Statements should be given appropriate weight. Planning decisions should consider adjacent applications when determining an application for development as the total impact on an area can be severe. Emphasis should be on developing brownfield sites.

More details about Rep ID: 2357

Representation ID: 2352

COMMENT Fressingfield Parish Council (Mr Alexander Day)

Summary:

See response to question 5A

The Parish Council firmly believes that without cooperation between those planning authorities in neighbouring areas, often in adjacent counties, that a cohesive Local Plan cannot be made. Residents at the perimeter of the MSDC jurisdiction will often view towns in adjacent counties as their focus for healthcare, shopping, entertainment and recreational pursuits and are consequently drawn out of Suffolk for these purposes, sometimes increasing the burden on those other counties or, of course, vice versa.

More details about Rep ID: 2352

Representation ID: 1997

COMMENT Braintree District Council (Ms Julie O'Hara )

Summary:

Braintree District Council draws attention to the presence of cross boundary issues relating to

i) Sudbury bypass; and
ii) Braintree District desegnated "Protected Lanes" close to the boundary

We trust that these matters will be taken into consideration when formulating future versions of the plan.

More details about Rep ID: 1997

Representation ID: 1932

COMMENT Mrs Tania Farrow

Summary:

Sustainable transport and better telecommunications

More details about Rep ID: 1932

Representation ID: 1901

COMMENT Palgrave Parish Council (Sarah Foote)

Summary:

Specific co-operation to support the cross-boundary Diss & District Neighbourhood Plan, in order to secure its timely and successful progress.

More details about Rep ID: 1901

Representation ID: 1640

COMMENT Hoxne Parish Council (Mrs Sara Foote)

Summary:

No comment

More details about Rep ID: 1640

Representation ID: 1435

COMMENT Mr William Eaton

Summary:

A1066, A143, A140.
All our major roads are mainly single carriage ways.
Dual carriage way improvements required due to the increase in vehicles especially heavy goods.
Brexit :- maybe increase in container traffic to Suffolk ports.

More details about Rep ID: 1435

Representation ID: 1377

COMMENT Mr Alf Hannan

Summary:

Early and meaningful engagement and collaboration with neighbourhoods, local organisations and businesses is essential. A wide section of the community should be proactively engaged, so that Local Plans, as far as possible, reflect a collective vision and a set of agreed priorities for the sustainable development of the area, including those contained in any neighbourhood plans that have been made

More details about Rep ID: 1377

Representation ID: 1223

COMMENT Raydon Parish Council (Mrs Jane Cryer)

Summary:

Any Local Enterprise Partnership established to promote economic growth in the area should be consulted on how to best support and achieve economic growth.

More details about Rep ID: 1223

Representation ID: 932

COMMENT Mr Roy Barker

Summary:

Energy Efficient

More details about Rep ID: 932

Representation ID: 910

COMMENT Mr David Brown

Summary:

It is essential that any undertakings given by Developers in respect of Planning Conditions are upheld without any dilution whatsoever. Historically it has been common for Developers to renege on the conditions they have signed up to.

More details about Rep ID: 910

Representation ID: 522

COMMENT Redgrave Parish Council (Mr John Giddings)

Summary:

RPC agrees subject to priority being given to expansion of social housing and bungalows rather than large detached housing approved historically.

More details about Rep ID: 522

Representation ID: 105

COMMENT Mrs Sara Knight

Summary:

Environmental protection is more than just conservation. A forward-thinking strategy would place more emphasis on positive measures to create alternative energy resources at a local level as this will be a key issue in the time-frame of this development plan.

More details about Rep ID: 105

Representation ID: 1

OBJECT Mr Carroll Reeve

Summary:

The NPPF at Section 150 onwards relates to Plan-making. Your proposition above jumps to paragraph 156. This ignores the guidance at paragraph 155 for early and meaningful engagement etc. Without this the Plan cannot be compliant with the NPPF taken as a whole.

More details about Rep ID: 1

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult